29 réponses à ce sujet

[Nemesis7884]

i am wondering if a duelist will be a front line fighter like warrior and be able to keep up against a warrior of any specialization...?

or is it something like duelist is better against 1vs1 and warrior 1vsN ?

[AviramG]

If a duelist cant defeat a warrior 1v1 then the dualist is a complete waste of space tactically

[Nemesis7884]

why? then you could say the warrior was a waste? so i guess it they should be even... but since its a group game and rogues are supportive characters, i am not so sure

[minamber]

Since the rogue class isn't meant to be a tank, I don't think any of its specializations would fare well in 1vs1. Basically, a rogue can probably deal more damage than a warrior if he's backstabbing, but is not meant to take hits.

I doubt the duelist specialization changes that very much.

[AviramG]

but the warrior is good at surviving and fighting multiple enemies.



If a duelist whos sole purpose is to win 1v1 fights cant beat a warrior, then tactically there is no sense in ever using a duelist

[ByblosHex]

AviramG wrote...

but the warrior is good at surviving and fighting multiple enemies.

If a duelist whos sole purpose is to win 1v1 fights cant beat a warrior, then tactically there is no sense in ever using a duelist

Unless it's a party based game... oh wait, it is.

[Nemesis7884]

since this is not an mmo i guess there is no balancing between the classes more a "complimentation" maybe a duelist will be better against a specific type of foe while a warrior will be against another (e.g. armored / non armored etc.)

Modifié par Nemesis7884, 31 octobre 2009 - 08:41 .

[Astalder]

A duelist is a dps class, theoretically it should do more damage than a dual weapon warrior but also take significantly more damage. You could use a dual weapon warrior as an offtank, but with a duelist rogue you're likely going to sacrifice that option for the increased damage.



One on one comparisons are idiotic, the only place they're more idiotic than in a party based MMO is in a party based SINGLE PLAYER RPG.

[Jacks-Up]

AviramG wrote...

but the warrior is good at surviving and fighting multiple enemies.

If a duelist whos sole purpose is to win 1v1 fights cant beat a warrior, then tactically there is no sense in ever using a duelist

He could probably 1 vs 1 him amusing he gets the jump and cripples him enough before he can counter but if you're just running up and swinging than no I doubt it but that not very roguely.

[Nemesis7884]

Astalder wrote...

A duelist is a dps class, theoretically it should do more damage than a dual weapon warrior but also take significantly more damage. You could use a dual weapon warrior as an offtank, but with a duelist rogue you're likely going to sacrifice that option for the increased damage.

One on one comparisons are idiotic, the only place they're more idiotic than in a party based MMO is in a party based SINGLE PLAYER RPG.

well the comparsion is more directed towards the enemies - in the end, their folkes also distribute on rogue, warrior, archer/mage

[AviramG]

ByblosHex wrote...

AviramG wrote...

but the warrior is good at surviving and fighting multiple enemies.

If a duelist whos sole purpose is to win 1v1 fights cant beat a warrior, then tactically there is no sense in ever using a duelist

Unless it's a party based game... oh wait, it is.

If you think about it a bit, you'll see that what you say makes no sense.
If a warrior beats a duelist 1v1, then the fighter defeats any opponent the duelist defeats 1v1. also, it can defeat multiple enemies.
ergo the duelist serves no purpose.

"oh wait, it is... oh how witty i am, guffaw guffaw"

[hexaligned]

AviramG wrote...

ByblosHex wrote...

AviramG wrote...

but the warrior is good at surviving and fighting multiple enemies.

If a duelist whos sole purpose is to win 1v1 fights cant beat a warrior, then tactically there is no sense in ever using a duelist

Unless it's a party based game... oh wait, it is.

If you think about it a bit, you'll see that what you say makes no sense.
If a warrior beats a duelist 1v1, then the fighter defeats any opponent the duelist defeats 1v1. also, it can defeat multiple enemies.
ergo the duelist serves no purpose.

"oh wait, it is... oh how witty i am, guffaw guffaw"

You mean besides stealth, lockpicking, and trap making...right?

[GhoXen]

Rather similar to the relationship between rogues and arms warrior back in WoW TBC, warriors can generally dominate rogues with ease. The main reason here is the simple talent "Indomitable", which completely bashes a rogue's CCs useless in a PvP situation(which by the way will never happen in DAO).

[J.O.G]

relhart wrote...
You mean besides stealth, lockpicking, and trap making...right?

That's the point, the assassin is a more devious rogue, the duelist tends more to open/fair combat, the bard is a buffer, and the ranger a summoner.

[hexaligned]

J.O.G wrote...

relhart wrote...
You mean besides stealth, lockpicking, and trap making...right?

That's the point, the assassin is a more devious rogue, the duelist tends more to open/fair combat, the bard is a buffer, and the ranger a summoner.

Whats your point?  You need to bring a rogue if you want to do any of those things, duelist makes them better melee fighters than they would have been, the others provide other bonuses.  This isn't an mmo where all you are focused on is who does the most damage, there are other things to take into account.

[J.O.G]

relhart wrote...

J.O.G wrote...

relhart wrote...
You mean besides stealth, lockpicking, and trap making...right?

That's the point, the assassin is a more devious rogue, the duelist tends more to open/fair combat, the bard is a buffer, and the ranger a summoner.

Whats your point?  You need to bring a rogue if you want to do any of those things, duelist makes them better melee fighters than they would have been, the others provide other bonuses.  This isn't an mmo where all you are focused on is who does the most damage, there are other things to take into account.

My point is that you have a point.

The specialisations are just that: specialisations. A combat oriented rogue is still a rogue, If he were on par with a fighter in a fair 1on1 match there would be something wrong with the fighter.

[telephasic]

FWIW, it's pretty clear now that the weapon strength requirements are out that rogues, practically speaking, will never wear anything but leather armor/never wield anything but daggers in melee combat.

By the endgame, the best leather armors require 20 strength. Medium armor, in contrast, requires 34. Wielding the best longswords or axes requires 31 strength, and the best maces 32 strength.

Putting those extra 11-14 attribute points into strength just isn't worth it, when you could focus on dex (higher defense, better damage with piercing weapons), willpower (more talents), con (more HP) or cunning (better armor piercing, higher damage once you have lethality).

You shouldn't expect a rogue to be a better warrior than a warrior - why else have a warrior?  

Modifié par telephasic, 31 octobre 2009 - 09:50 .

[ByblosHex]

There may be some Dexterity based longswords, like Rapiers or something.

[telephasic]

ByblosHex wrote...

There may be some Dexterity based longswords, like Rapiers or something.

No.  At least not judging by the pages online from the Prima guide. 

[Adamski_707]

ByblosHex wrote...

There may be some Dexterity based longswords, like Rapiers or something.

That is something i would like to see.

[Chartis]

I'll beat you in a duel, but I concede that you'd win in a war.

[Maria Caliban]

relhart wrote...

You mean besides stealth, lockpicking, and trap making...right?

Which all rogues and rogue specializations do. What does the *duelist* specialization do that those others don't?

[hexaligned]

Maria Caliban wrote...

relhart wrote...

You mean besides stealth, lockpicking, and trap making...right?

Which all rogues and rogue specializations do. What does the *duelist* specialization do that those others don't?

there are copies of the Prima guide up online if you want to know, I'm not going to link it.

Edit :  From a quick scan it looks like assassins are more sustained damage, where as duelist are goign to be more crit happy/spikey damage.

Modifié par relhart, 31 octobre 2009 - 10:24 .

[AffectedFiddle]

Duelist seems to be a debuffer with some very high burst - can make all attacks for a period of time critical so against a mage you lower defense then go to town, or go nuts with some heavy backstabbing criticals. Assassin + Duelist looks quite nasty.

[Foxd1e]

You guys are missing the other half of the Duelist class that makes them great, Rogues in general have great talents for evading damage, A few of the Duelist's abilities take that one step further making Duelist's even harder to hit than standard evading rogues.

Duelists also excel at dealing damage to vital points. So yes Duelists are the rogues Melee attack specialists.


The standing question is could one beat a AI warrior type class? I don't see why not as long as you keep his dexterity high, focus on the rogue evasion talents and have specialized in a couple of the Duelists talents as well.

Modifié par Foxd1e, 31 octobre 2009 - 11:16 .