Nizaris1 wrote...
1. Threaten and Taunt is level 4 talents, first you must learn Powerful and Precise Striking. Which mean at level 3 you only have ONE weapon talent to learn before you can tanking, in which it is not enough for tanking. While you are at level 4, you draw aggro but you can't hold it with your current weapon skill.
No
you can't.
I had absolutely no problem drawing and holding aggro without Threaten or Taunt at level 4. I had Powerful, Shield Bash, Shield Defense, and Shield Pummel. As long as you don't focus on levelling both Warrior trees in tandem you can have plenty of Weapon skills and easily keep the pressure on your Warrior and off everyone else. However this still isn't an example of something broken. Do the talents work as they're supposed to? Yes. Game's not broken. You can argue poor design if you wish but that's not the same thing.
Nizaris1 wrote...
2. Two Handler for off-tanking, all the talents are not for tank, only Sweep give you AoE melee at level 10, which mean originally Two Handlers is suppose to off-tank because there is no defense and escape mechanism other than Sweep at level 10. All other skills are for 1 vs 1 duel. But funnily Two Handlers got 1 talent that suppose to a tank talent that is Indomitable. Two Handlers don't need it much in off tank. Weapon and Shield is supposed to have Indomitable.
Take another look at the two hander skills. Most of them focus on consistently dealing out high damage, Indomitable is a necessary skill for this kind of character because it prevents breaks in the flow. A stunned S&B can still absorb damage, but a stunned TH can't deal any out. Certainly not broken, just not designed the way you'd like it.
Nizaris1 wrote...
3. You draw aggro in early game, the enemies surround you taking turn to use Dirty Fighting or Shield Pummel, some of the enemy using Bash on you, as a tank you can do nothing to handle the situation, you will rely on your healer to heal you in which you don't get healer early in the game. You just a sitting duck there. In higher level, archer enemies also have scatter shot, then your tank is suck. In 5 seconds you dead.
Again,
you are having this problem. The game's design doesn't fit well with
your playstyle. You start the game with a damn good CC mage/archer combo, when your tank get's stunned you Freeze, pin, or stun the enemies around him/her and they're back in fighting form in seconds. Again not broken, if you want to argue it, poor design.
Nizaris1 wrote...
5. Feign Death should not be the last perk in Rogue tree, it is because the player have build their rogue character to be able to stand in combat, no one use Feign Death. Don't lie to me, Feign Death is just a waste perk. It suppose to be the first perk not the last, because when you are strong, you don't need to fake death. That is broken.
My rogues aren't built to stand in combat, your argument fails. Stealth, stun, back stab/weapon talen to death, repeat, Feign Death for when they draw too much attention and Steath's not done cooldown. However it's not broken. You may have a point that it's poor design, but it isn't broken. Broken means it doesn't work as intended which Feign Death does (mostly).
Nizaris1 wrote...
6. In DA:O, the combat is always mob fighting, but the game doesn't provide the proper mechanic to handle it. 4 person with tank, dps, nuke and healer tu run against mob. Each mob deal X damage, stun and bash to a suck tank, the tank can't hold it, Two Handler off tank is too slow, backstabbing Rogue and haler Mage are too fragile...when tank down, all down. That is broken mechanic. Just try out Denerim Back Alley early on.
People hold off on doing Back Alley? I go from Lothering to Denerim and use it to get the level I need to get Leliana the trap making skill to complete that quest back in Lothering. Tank, DPS, Nuke, Healer is
one party composition against mobs, it might even be the most effective/efficient, but it's not the only one. Two Stealths, DPS, CC works for me. So does Two Tank, CC, Stealth. Heck I can even run Nuke, Healer, CC, Archer and do well in combat. Not broken, in your opinion, poor design.
Nizaris1 wrote...
6. Alistair is an anti-Mage, at the same time he suppose to be a tank, but he don't fit both in early and middle game. His stats is to low for a tank, and he only have 1 talent that is drain mana in which useless fighting mages early on. He is a total mess. The Hurlock Alpha in Korcari Wild give fireball and he can do nothing as an anti mage. The same with against mages early on at Circle Tower, or in the ruin at Denerim. By the time he have other anti-mage skills, there are not much mages anymore in the game, and mages are not a threat anymore. Not only that, he suck at tanking. Alistair is the perfect example of broken mechanic.
Ever look past the S&B and consider Alistair was never intended as a tank? You say yourself he doesn't have the stats for it. He's got too much willpower for one and his low starting strength and dependency on other attributes for his abilities (Dex, Wil) means he can't get to the heavier armors as quickly as Sten, Oghren, or the Warden. I've found he's most effective as a quick-strike against mages or other ranged heavy hitters. He can handle damage well enough to get in close then knockdown/stun and beat them down. Again even if Alistair were a tank that doesn't mean anything's broken. He may not be an optimized tank but it's not the game's job to give you optimized party members. Again broken means something doesn't work the way it was intended to; it doesn't mean it doesn't work the way similar features do in other games.
Which I think is the heart of why this argument will never stop. You're confusing, either through difficulty with the language or simply an inability to distance yourself from your opinion, the game being poorly designed (in your opinion) to the game being broken. One is a subjective critique based on past experience, the other is an objective assessment based on what the devs actually wanted the game to do.
Retour en haut
Too invested in your own opinion to adequately distance yourself from it and observer reality objectively.
Thanks for the laugh.
