156 réponses à ce sujet

[F-C]

i find these responses to reek of bitterness and one sided bias.

the rogue has much more survivability than a mage, a mage has to fall back on control to survive an encounter. without said control he is dead meat in comparison.

his aoe damage may be greater, but his single target is lower.

also if you read the guys post carefully he says that the rogue is even outdamaging his aoe dps mage.


your posts are just smack full of one sided bitterness and mage hatred.

Modifié par F-C, 18 novembre 2009 - 04:12 .

[chizow]

F-C wrote...

http://social.biowar.../9/index/222939

that thread about rogues being the highest damage in the game makes this whole thread a big joke.

there is a player right there proving the mage whiners wrong.

bioware is telling you its working as intended.


get a grip, really.

Riddley313 wrote...
From my understanding, forums are for discussion. If a forum dedicated to a game is getting no constructive feedback, what does that tell you about the game?

as far as this goes, i would say in general forums are covered in whines and complaints no matter what games forum you go to.

ive pretty much come to the conclusion that most game forums are there only for the whiners to have a place to cry.

What makes that thread you linked even funnier is how the OP made it very clear they were referring to highest melee dps.  Comparing it to mage damage would be a joke really, given Storm of the Century does ~70 per tick to an entire screen full of mobs.....

[F-C]

let me quote him for you since reading comprehension seems to be lacking here.





"This is a pure dagger rogue on Nightmare diffculty... I do far more damage than any of my other melee characters (and sometimes more overall damage than my best dps mage)."





more overall damage than my best dps mage.





bitter little mage haters.

[Odd Hermit]

F-C wrote...

i find these responses to reek of bitterness and one sided bias.

the rogue has much more survivability than a mage, a mage has to fall back on control to survive an encounter. without said control he is dead meat in comparison.

his aoe damage may be greater, but his single target is lower.

also if you read the guys post carefully he says that the rogue is even outdamaging his aoe dps mage.


your posts are just smack full of one sided bitterness and mage hatred.

I actually play a mage character, and I like mages. I play a mage or caster in almost all RPG games I play.
I simply want combat to be better balanced. Right now it feels like the more mages I have in a party the better.

[Ninjaphrog]

AWJ9999 wrote...

Odd Hermit wrote...


[*]Stamina regeneration determined by...willpower? Why not constitution?

Err, because then Willpower would be a completely deadweight stat for non-mages? As opposed to Magic which is only about 90% deadweight for them...

                                                                    
[*]Well that just shows how broken the game is isn't it? They can't even make the names for the attributes make sense anymore...
[*]POOR job Bioware, really Poor job.

[F-C]

Odd Hermit wrote...

I actually play a mage character, and I like mages. I play a mage or caster in almost all RPG games I play.
I simply want combat to be better balanced. Right now it feels like the more mages I have in a party the better.

you have a player posting and showing you how you are wrong.

you have bioware telling you its working as intended.

what more proof do you need?

[Poleaxe]

Why are you calling for a mage nerf in a single player game?

[Kahryl]

Poleaxe wrote...

Why are you calling for a mage nerf in a single player game?

Maybe it's more a calling to make rogues and warriors useful next to mages?

Games get a tad boring when one class is far and above better than the others.

Modifié par Kahryl, 18 novembre 2009 - 04:23 .

[F-C]

even having proof that rogues are the highest damage in the game and you still reply with that drivel.



/facepalm

[Odd Hermit]

F-C wrote...

you have a player posting and showing you how you are wrong.

you have bioware telling you its working as intended.

what more proof do you need?

Many players are complaining about class balance, and "working as intended" means absolutely nothing coming from game developers these days. Just because some players can do well with a rogue, in one particular area, doesn't make mages balanced. He also said himself his rogue outdoes his mages damage "sometimes". Sometimes =/= always.

Poleaxe wrote...

Why are you calling for a mage nerf in a single player game?

Odd Hermit wrote...





I actually play a mage character, and I like mages. I play a mage or caster in almost all RPG games I play.

I simply want combat to be better balanced. Right now it feels like the more mages I have in a party the better.

[chizow]

F-C wrote...


let me quote him for you since reading comprehension seems to be lacking here.


"This is a pure dagger rogue on Nightmare diffculty... I do far more damage than any of my other melee characters (and sometimes more overall damage than my best dps mage)."


more overall damage than my best dps mage.


bitter little mage haters.

Like I said, 30-40 per swing compared to 70 dmg per tick to every mob within 2 screens...hmmm lol.  There's no mage hating going on, there's just the same few apologists trying to minimize clear gameplay imbalances.

[F-C]

Odd Hermit wrote...
Many players are complaining about class balance, and "working as intended" means absolutely nothing coming from game developers these days.

do you really expect anyone to take you seriously with comments like this?

they make the money, you are just whining on their forums.

think about it.

[Kahryl]

F-C wrote...

Odd Hermit wrote...
Many players are complaining about class balance, and "working as intended" means absolutely nothing coming from game developers these days.

do you really expect anyone to take you seriously with comments like this?

they make the money, you are just whining on their forums.

think about it.

If you think this discussion is pointless then you can go, it's OK . We'll carry on somehow without your insights. Remember the sixpack and your girl are waiting.

[Schyzm]

wow look some of the hate patrol found this thread. careful about your opinions on the game people! you might be deemed unworthy by f-c and be subsequently trolled for 5 or 6 pages.

[F-C]

Kahryl wrote...

If you think this discussion is pointless then you can go, it's OK . We'll carry on somehow without your insights. Remember the sixpack and your girl are waiting.

lol, that you are going to carry your bitterness over to this thread is just too funny.

im sure you would like me to leave though, whiners like you dont like having to face the truth, you just want to wallow in your pity party.

[Schyzm]

F-C wrote...

Kahryl wrote...

If you think this discussion is pointless then you can go, it's OK . We'll carry on somehow without your insights. Remember the sixpack and your girl are waiting.

lol, that you are going to carry your bitterness over to this thread is just too funny.

im sure you would like me to leave though, whiners like you dont like having to face the truth, you just want to wallow in your pity party.

it would certainly be a lot more constructive a forum with people talking about the game instead of the flame wars that you universally want to start.

[F-C]

Schyzm wrote...
it would certainly be a lot more constructive a forum with people talking about the game instead of the flame wars that you universally want to start.

like you calling this an "abortion of a game" or saying "bioware is a total failure of a company"

yeah, you sure got class there kiddo.

[Schyzm]

F-C wrote...

Schyzm wrote...
it would certainly be a lot more constructive a forum with people talking about the game instead of the flame wars that you universally want to start.

like you calling this an "abortion of a game" or saying "bioware is a total failure of a company"

yeah, you sure got class there kiddo.

I actually said the combat mechanics are an abortion.  there's lots about the game besides combat that is done well.  of course you being a total liar is about as shocking as the sun coming up today.

troll away trollmaster.

[Emloch]

AWJ9999 wrote...

Yeah, spellcasters in D&D 3e are ridiculously single-stat dependent. Dunno about 4e, never played it.

I can say that if you build a spellcaster in D&D (any edition) and only focus on one stat then you've built a very inefficient character who would die very easily. If not, then you've had a terrible DM. EVERY stat in D&D is very useful and important to every class (yes, even charisma).


As for Dragon Age, it isn't much different.

Strength not only adds more damage to your attacks, it also provides resistance to physical spells (namely, poison but also cold, etc. ) and traumas.

Dexterity doesn't just give you better aim with a bow; it helps raise your armor class. You're harder to hit.

Willpower doesn't just give you a bigger mana/stamina pool. It also governs your resistance to mind altering spells.

Magic doesn't just make magic more powerful. It also governs how effective potions and poultices are when that character uses them. More hit points healed.

Cunning increases the success chance of all skills. It also contributes to your chance of hitting your target succesfully and, like willpower, helps with mind altering spells.

Constitution gives you more hit points and like strength, provides resistance to physicalities.

As you can see, every stat is very beneficial to any class. Sure, you can survive as a mage with terrible dexterity but the higher it is, the fewer health poitions and healing you'll need. The bottom line is that you can survive by ignoring certain stats but I can assure you that things will go much easier for you if you don't

Some of the stats don't make sense from a logical standpoint (stamina should, logically, be governed by constitution) but it's all about balance. Though I suppose willpower can help people to 'press onward" (mind over matter). Regardless, it's balanced enough for me.

All of my characters have one or two primary stats but for the most part, I keep all stats climbing.

Modifié par Emloch, 18 novembre 2009 - 05:14 .

[RENEGADEXVIII]

The only stat based alteration that I would agree with would be unmarrying the usefulness of the Magic stat to melee classes,making it just as useless for melee classes as the Strength stat is to Magi...



The concept that the Mage class is overpowered because it's possible to solely pump the Magic stat while ignoring all others is flawed.It is possible to create a high risk spell-caster build in this fashion but the underlining weakness would be the inability to avoid attacks (due to low dex) and the inability to take even low levels of damage (due to low cons) so it's more of a trade off than anything else.A melee class can also concentrate on pumping damage dealing stats (namely strength) while ignoring dex and cons for a high risk build as well.

[Odd Hermit]

RENEGADEXVIII wrote...

The only stat based alteration that I would agree with would be unmarrying the usefulness of the Magic stat to melee classes,making it just as useless for melee classes as the Strength stat is to Magi...

The concept that the Mage class is overpowered because it's possible to solely pump the Magic stat while ignoring all others is flawed.It is possible to create a high risk spell-caster build in this fashion but the underlining weakness would be the inability to avoid attacks (due to low dex) and the inability to take even low levels of damage (due to low cons) so it's more of a trade off than anything else.A melee class can also concentrate on pumping damage dealing stats (namely strength) while ignoring dex and cons for a high risk build as well.

It's not as high risk for a mage because they're not in melee range, and have several ways to prevent normal mobs from reaching them. Also, killing things faster often results in less damage taken anyway.

[soteria]

I think mages are too powerful, but I disagree with it being because of the stats. They're too powerful because they are the only class that can heal or crowd control effectively.



Toning down the power of lyrium potions would be a good idea if the game were balanced for it--I'm not sure it is. I do think it's a little whacked that magic is apparently almost as important a stat for receiving healing as it is for giving it out.

[Skemte]

hireuin wrote...

where's your evidence that the stats are broken?

'because you say so' ?

on my second playthrough now, as a dual wield warrior - played mage last time around - and i believe it's the most balanced game i've ever seen in terms of the mechanics, being loot, experience, skills/talents, attributes, difficulty.

almost every fight is an intense 'almost die' struggle on hardcore, from level 1 to level 20. unless you use one of the 'cheats' such as the two offensive mage or forcefield tank build.

supply us with some valid evidence and people may take your accusation seriously.

lol you said its one of the most balanced games ever, than you point out "cheats" in the game like having two mages.... Priceless.

[Skemte]

soteria wrote...

I think mages are too powerful, but I disagree with it being because of the stats. They're too powerful because they are the only class that can heal or crowd control effectively.

Toning down the power of lyrium potions would be a good idea if the game were balanced for it--I'm not sure it is. I do think it's a little whacked that magic is apparently almost as important a stat for receiving healing as it is for giving it out.

  I would be for specialization trees like the warrior and rogue have to do.. This would make things challenging with a build being forced into primal or some other tree..  Seems a tad easier to do than completely reworking the rogue and warrior tree to being able to spread out their skills like the mage can.

[DragoonKain3]

Seriously guys...



http://social.biowar.../9/index/223777



Multiply that damage by 2x for the backstab multiplier, and multiply by 1.43 for momentum, and you've got 286 dps per second on a single target. Multiply that for 15 seconds worth of Pinpoint STriking (ie. backstab at any angle), and you get over 4k damage in the span of time a mage's spells takes to cooldown alone. Combat movement also means that outside of pinpoint strike, you would still be able to achieve backstabs easily.



So while a rogue might not outdamage a mage all of the time single target, with that INSANE amount of damage, I still would say vast majority of the time.





As to why mages have access to CC, AoE, AND support, blame Bioware there. They were the one who wanted to mix wizard and cleric into one class . The good thing is that you only have enough talent points to be a really good wizard OR a really good cleric... anything beyond that and you have to sacrifice something to gain the other skills.



So as they say, mages are 'inline' with their vision of them. Sure there needs to be some things changed (shimmering shield, multiple mage cone of colds, a lot of spells not needing Line of Sight, etc.), but so far its dead on in terms of overall party balance.



Warriors - INSANE tanking and aggro management, DW versions can do decent single target damage



Rogues - INSANE single target DPS, can be utility as well



Mages - INSANE aoes/ccs OR support spells, or something in between.





Think about it guys, the balanced party is made out of Warrior, Rogue, Wizarrd, Cleric. In DAO, this translates to Warrior, Rogue, Mage (AoE/CC focus), and Mage (Support focus). Alternatively, its also Warrior, Rogue, 2x Mage (both hybrids). Nothing wrong here.