128 réponses à ce sujet

[Kaosgirl]

Faerell Gustani wrote...

So, what if I want to play a CC styled mage but also want a gameplay challenge?

Make suboptimal build choices and try to compensate with in-game tactics?

I know, I know:  heresy.  

[Xultep]

Faerell Gustani wrote...

I suppose I'm just getting irritated with all of the people saying "It's fine" when it really isn't.  Those people aren't really Gamers in my opinion.  They're just people who would rather read a novel or watch a movie because they don't seem to care about gameplay.

There are different degrees of fine, IMO.  Are there problems, yeah, but I really like the rule system at the core.  I think in general developers have gone CC happy in games lately.  But it almost seems like the game was designed around a ton of CC.  That why I said in my previous post, if you got CC, the game seems a lot easier than if you don't.

[Hyunsai]

Wow, this game was sold as a "tactical" one ? The version without mages, for sure... ^^

I used melee so far, and tried mage a few hours...

That was jawdropping... Really... I really think I will stick with it, the gameplay of the heavy and lumpish warrior with all those collisions and pathfinding issues was getting on my nerves...


Like someone here said, if mages were forced to choose a line of spells like warrior for their weapon, it would be something else...

 I totally understand the OP, if it's his favorite class (so we can't give him the "play without mages" crap), he can't expect much of a challenge, as the entire game was made like a caster allegory to prove their divinity to the world (lore, you know)... So yes, balance can matter in a solo game.

Modifié par Hyunsai, 27 novembre 2009 - 02:46 .

[Faerell Gustani]

Tonya777 wrote...

Tactical challenge? Play on nightmare WITHOUT Wynne in your party

That is no stroll in the park for sure

But again, what if I like having a mage in my party?  Why are "mage" and "tactical challege" mutually exclusive?

[FedericoV]

Kaosgirl wrote...

Faerell Gustani wrote...

So, what if I want to play a CC styled mage but also want a gameplay challenge?

Make suboptimal build choices and try to compensate with in-game tactics?

I know, I know:  heresy.  

No it's an absurdity. I understand why many Bio fans defends DA:O's rule system no matter what... I'm a Bioware fan-boy too: I will buy every expansion, DLC or game with DA brand on it. I enjoy DA:O a lot and I know that it's a miracle that such a game (for scope, lenght and depth) has reach the market. Thanks Bioware!

But still: a game system where you have to make sub-optimal choices to face a challenge is not an example of great design. A class system where there is class that is a joke and that's here only to open locks full of junk, another class (the warrior) that's balanced to death, has crappy specialization and that at mid game has allready taken the better gear, and a huber class that's not balanced in any expect, it's not an example of great design. I understand that modern game design has not fear of asymmetry... but in DA:O they have exceeded the limit.

I repeat my self: even the talent/spells books are asymmetrical (maybe because they know that there are many useful spells while there are not many useful warrior/rogue talent...).

The lack of balance between classes is not a game balance issue of course. It does not break the game. But it does effect the experience of players nonetheless. Considering that they have 6 years to develop DA, I expected a better system than BG's adaptation of AD&D.  Well, it's not the case. Even in AD&D mages were overpowered but they still need a party. That's not really true for DA:O.

Modifié par FedericoV, 27 novembre 2009 - 07:59 .

[Majspuffen]

I've played a mage two times in a row. First time to play through the game and learn stuff etc. Second time with more experience. Now I'm playing as a warrior, and I think it's alot of fun. More fun than the mage class? Can't give an answer to that. But tanking is awesome

So there you have it. Why play as another class? Because it's fun and different. This is not an mmorpg where class balance is needed.

[Elanareon]

Because BM/AW is boring. Though i liked the concept

Besides Mages are supposed to be almighty and alpowerful! It's not about the game mechanics or the game system etc. etc. etc. Its about the "lore"! I ask you why does warrior has to be as powerful as mages whereas mages command the elements and warriors just swings his sword? Its illogical! If playing warrior for you isnt fun then don't play em!

As a side note u don't know why you you are not having fun as a warrior. I think the warrior class in this game is the most fun to play with. Don't get me wrong in all of the RPG's i played i always choose a mage. I was even a mage in WoW. hehe but that didn't last long.

Modifié par Elanareon, 27 novembre 2009 - 08:43 .

[Original182]

Short answer: for the other origins story and achievements.

[Pellegrin]

If you are concerned with balance in the game try one of the mods available...



Mages are still powerful but OP is something that can be changed.

[FedericoV]

Elanareon wrote...

Because BM/AW is boring. Though i liked the concept

Besides Mages are supposed to be almighty and alpowerful! It's not about the game mechanics or the game system etc. etc. etc. Its about the "lore"! I ask you why does warrior has to be as powerful as mages whereas mages command the elements and warriors just swings his sword? Its illogical! If playing warrior for you isnt fun then don't play em!

As a side note u don't know why you you are not having fun as a warrior. I think the warrior class in this game is the most fun to play with. Don't get me wrong in all of the RPG's i played i always choose a mage. I was even a mage in WoW. hehe but that didn't last long.

Yep, but if it's a lore thing... they should have penalized MORE mages in terms of RP/Story and the templar specialization should have been more powerful. Choiche and consequences: people hate and fear mages, right? Where are the consequences? C'mon, the lore can't be an excuse for game design choices. A system where you have to resist the urge of using spells/potions to face a challenge in battle is far from perfect.

Modifié par FedericoV, 27 novembre 2009 - 09:26 .

[Emryc]

Because Aragorn and Gimli were far more awesome than Gandalf.

[Red-Cell]

I played a warrior full archer my first play through. Playing a mage my second play through is much more enjoyable.

Modifié par Red-Cell, 27 novembre 2009 - 10:13 .

[Gecon]

I bet that.



I would definitely prefer playing Rogue for archery. With Bard/Ranger as Specs you at least have some benefit for the party. Theres no useful Warrior specialization for archery.

[Kastlefeer]

I've been playing a rogue this last playthrough and I feel they have a lot of nice tricks/gameplay etc ... but when I spy a big mob of darkspawn round the corner Wynn can glyph combo them all into stun set up storm of the century and blast the whole cavern to dust rather effortlessly, meh



Mages are kinda like David Lee Roth ... Van Halen just sucks without 'im.

[JaegerBane]

Domi-kuin wrote...

JaegerBane wrote...
Speak for yourself. I thoroughly enjoy walking through a cave of uglies and rattling off combo after combo of spells while my mortal sidekicks scramble around finishing off my victims.

Nice, want a medal for that?

Perhaps you should stick to playing hello kitty games, that offer no challenge.

No medal required, but if you're feeling generous it would be great if you could get off your high horse and stop waving your e-penis about as if it meant something.

This is a game, domi-kuin. I play games for fun. Whether you consider it to be 'too easy' or too much like hello kitty or whatever nonsense is running around inside your skull is ultimately the concern of no-one but yourself. I happen to like the pacing and I happen to like the impact of the magic in this game, and I'm not going to apologise to nuts like you for doing so.

Modifié par JaegerBane, 27 novembre 2009 - 05:23 .

[Jolly Teaparty]

Because I love sucking behind my shield.

[MingWolf]

Damiannnnn wrote...
When my mage can tank, heal, and do 96% of the DPS of my group of 4  (all at the same time) then why should I play as anything other than a mage?

Because it is more heroic playing an armored warrior or rogue who can do some wicked feats and charge into battle like Leeroy Jenkins

[Brunopolis]

Here's an easy solution to the mage problem. Rogues(rogues can get a sniper specialization instead) and Warriors get the ranger specialization for free. Sure mages will still be overpowered but the free pet will go a decent way towards making the classes equal in power. 8)

[DaeFaron]

To the OP, if you auto-leveled Leliana, she would suck with two daggers. Seeing as her default setup of talents is that of an ARCHER. Meaning give her a bow and she does pretty good, I'd say slap the ranger spec on her to enhance that more, though I didn't unlock ranger in my first playthrough.

[Jolly Teaparty]

Brunopolis wrote...

Here's an easy solution to the mage problem. Rogues(rogues can get a sniper specialization instead) and Warriors get the ranger specialization for free. Sure mages will still be overpowered but the free pet will go a decent way towards making the classes equal in power. 8)

Neeeeh, I don't like the idea of having a pet, doesn't fit in with the flavour of my character. I reckon they need to make armour make a bigger difference, and make rogues do more damage. Or alternatively just scale back the offensive power of mages and have them just be the CC machines they are.

Or alternatively they could do nothing because it's single player and the idea of mages being rare but incredibly dangerous works for me.

[F-C]

if bioware did anything wrong it was simply making melee classes require a stat that would seem wrong to players from other games, and thats willpower.



if you stack up a lot of willpower on a melee class they can spam a lot of abilities, and become a lot more powerful as the moderator was saying in the thread about 2hds.



however most players of mmo games and the like see this as wrong, its not the proper min/max build. so they put all of 0 points in willpower, then cry about their melee classes suck and their mages own.



apparently it needed to be dumbed down so that people couldnt make their melee classes wrong.

[sorrow_13th]

i have to agree with many people here that this is a RPG game, so the main reason why not to play mage is because i do not want myself to become a mage ^^

[Kaosgirl]

FedericoV wrote...

Kaosgirl wrote...

Faerell Gustani wrote...

So, what if I want to play a CC styled mage but also want a gameplay challenge?

Make suboptimal build choices and try to compensate with in-game tactics?

I know, I know:  heresy.  

No it's an absurdity. I understand why many Bio fans defends DA:O's rule system no matter what... I'm a Bioware fan-boy too: I will buy every expansion, DLC or game with DA brand on it. I enjoy DA:O a lot and I know that it's a miracle that such a game (for scope, lenght and depth) has reach the market. Thanks Bioware!

But still: a game system where you have to make sub-optimal choices to face a challenge is not an example of great design.

Bah. Games should always be balanced according to the average player's character-building skills, not the top elite who *deliberately* (if subconsciously) drop the gameplay challenge rating by only taking the Absolute Best character and party builds.  

(With some accounting for expected audience.)

Maybe the mage class doesn't even hit that.  But I'm seeing lots of people complaining that the game is "too hard" on normal, and playing with two mages in their party.  The people complaining that the mage is "broken" all seem to be either top-tier character builders or devotees blindly following the top-tier builds.  These same people literally define doing anything that isn't perfectly Min-Maxed as "retarded" or "absurd."  AFAICS, their real problem isn't really that the mage is 'overpowered,' it's that the other classed don't break as easily with a touch of butthurt over the game being balanced with their "lessers" in mind.

FedericoV wrote...
The lack of balance between classes is not a game balance issue of course. It does not break the game. But it does effect the experience of players nonetheless. Considering that they have 6 years to develop DA, I expected a better system than BG's adaptation of AD&D.  Well, it's not the case. Even in AD&D mages were overpowered but they still need a party. That's not really true for DA:O.

Actually, "need" is debatable in BG, and moreso in BG2 (where you don't have to worry about the typical AD&D "mages are damn near useless in the beginning to make up for being godlike in the endgame" method of balancing the mage.)  I've seen plenty a walkthrough with solo mages in BG. 

[DaeFaron]

Kaosgirl wrote...

FedericoV wrote...

Kaosgirl wrote...

Faerell Gustani wrote...

So, what if I want to play a CC styled mage but also want a gameplay challenge?

Make suboptimal build choices and try to compensate with in-game tactics?

I know, I know:  heresy.  

No it's an absurdity. I understand why many Bio fans defends DA:O's rule system no matter what... I'm a Bioware fan-boy too: I will buy every expansion, DLC or game with DA brand on it. I enjoy DA:O a lot and I know that it's a miracle that such a game (for scope, lenght and depth) has reach the market. Thanks Bioware!

But still: a game system where you have to make sub-optimal choices to face a challenge is not an example of great design.

Bah. Games should always be balanced according to the average player's character-building skills, not the top elite who *deliberately* (if subconsciously) drop the gameplay challenge rating by only taking the Absolute Best character and party builds.  

(With some accounting for expected audience.)

Maybe the mage class doesn't even hit that.  But I'm seeing lots of people complaining that the game is "too hard" on normal, and playing with two mages in their party.  The people complaining that the mage is "broken" all seem to be either top-tier character builders or devotees blindly following the top-tier builds.  These same people literally define doing anything that isn't perfectly Min-Maxed as "retarded" or "absurd."  AFAICS, their real problem isn't really that the mage is 'overpowered,' it's that the other classed don't break as easily with a touch of butthurt over the game being balanced with their "lessers" in mind.

FedericoV wrote...
The lack of balance between classes is not a game balance issue of course. It does not break the game. But it does effect the experience of players nonetheless. Considering that they have 6 years to develop DA, I expected a better system than BG's adaptation of AD&D.  Well, it's not the case. Even in AD&D mages were overpowered but they still need a party. That's not really true for DA:O.

Actually, "need" is debatable in BG, and moreso in BG2 (where you don't have to worry about the typical AD&D "mages are damn near useless in the beginning to make up for being godlike in the endgame" method of balancing the mage.)  I've seen plenty a walkthrough with solo mages in BG. 

Yep, I hate Min-max people. For example one time I was searching for a decent solid monk build in NWN, and the only thing that popped up was pvpers argueing about builds.

Min-Max people should stick with PVP if anything.

[Elanareon]

FedericoV wrote...

Elanareon wrote...

Because BM/AW is boring. Though i liked the concept

Besides Mages are supposed to be almighty and alpowerful! It's not about the game mechanics or the game system etc. etc. etc. Its about the "lore"! I ask you why does warrior has to be as powerful as mages whereas mages command the elements and warriors just swings his sword? Its illogical! If playing warrior for you isnt fun then don't play em!

As a side note u don't know why you you are not having fun as a warrior. I think the warrior class in this game is the most fun to play with. Don't get me wrong in all of the RPG's i played i always choose a mage. I was even a mage in WoW. hehe but that didn't last long.

Yep, but if it's a lore thing... they should have penalized MORE mages in terms of RP/Story and the templar specialization should have been more powerful. Choiche and consequences: people hate and fear mages, right? Where are the consequences? C'mon, the lore can't be an excuse for game design choices. A system where you have to resist the urge of using spells/potions to face a challenge in battle is far from perfect.

But what does balance has to do with anything? Warriors are far from useless like many has stated. Yes mages are powerful. They have to be, they use magic. I really don't know how you find warriors and rogues. I've played all three of them and personally i'm finding warriors much more fun than playing mages. And i usually go for mages. If you find them weak and subpar you are playing them wrong.