51 réponses à ce sujet

[cJohnOne]

Following on the Theme of having followers being more independent would it be a good idea to let them have their own style of play?  Should their gear be more fixed in place?

Modifié par cJohnOne, 17 avril 2012 - 10:01 .

[the_one_54321]

Absolutely not.

[Khayness]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Absolutely not.

I wouldn't have put it so mildly.

[Atakuma]

No.

[cJohnOne]

If they went all out in the indepentent follower direction I think it would work! But maybe it is more fun to customize your tactics.

[Maria Caliban]

cJohnOne wrote...

Following on the Theme of having followers being more independent would it be a good idea to let them have their own style of play?  Should their gear be more fixed in place?

Yes!

I'd like default behaviors to match companion personalities.

cJohnOne wrote...

If they went all out in the indepentent follower direction I think it would work! But maybe it is more fun to customize your tactics.

Instead of unlocking tactics with PC skill points, as in DA:O, I'd suggest that tactic slots be made available depending on companion experience and temperament, and the amount of influence that the PC has on them.

Someone like Aveline, for example, who is used to being in a military unit and has high self-discipline would start with lots of tactic slots available. Someone like Isabela who's used to doing her own thing would gain slots as you increased her Friendship/Rivalry. She's becoming more used to working with the group and taking orders from you.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 17 avril 2012 - 10:11 .

[TEWR]

No.

[MichaelStuart]

Followers petty much all ready have they own style of play, because you are limited by there abilities (I mostly end up having to micro mange my team, because they tend to get themselfs killed)

As long as I could upgrade followers weapons and armor with runes, I don't mind them having fix gear.

Modifié par MichaelStuart, 17 avril 2012 - 10:39 .

[Sutekh]

If you mean having their tactics locked with no player control at all, then no.

If you mean having personalized tactics available (say a loner wouldn't have team-based tactics), then maybe, at the start. Then unlock some more as the character / relationship / plot evolve, which would be a nice way to show that evolution, and how they're willing to take orders / advice from the PC.

It shouldn't be too restrictive, though, because you'd end up not taking such and such companion because of tactics you'd find umanageable or unpleasant, which would lead to a vicious circle of I don't take them, they don't participate, they don't change, no additional tactics, so I don't take them.

[andar91]

No,

[Dakota Strider]

The last few Bioware Games have given your NPC Companions far too much freedom, to act on their own, in my opinion. It would be fine if they behaved this way, if within the Player controls, it was much easier to direct them in combat, if a player chose to do so. But in recent games, combat control has become more and more difficult, compared to older Bioware RPG's. In DAO, I felt that the Bioware dev team at least made a real effort to allow the Player to control the npc's, if he or she chose. But that control was almost entirely gone in DA2, and when I played ME3, the amount of control I had in directing the NPC's in combat was so small, it was not even worth using.

[Mmw04014]

Party based combat become useless if you can't give them direction.

No way.

[Hayes1987]

cJohnOne wrote...

Following on the Theme of having followers being more independent would it be a good idea to let them have their own style of play?  Should their gear be more fixed in place?

No........

[Zexiv]

No  I'd prefer to be able to build my companion to suit what I want.  For example I'm playing a duel wielding rogue so instead of having a second due wielding NPC I might want to make the NPC rogue into something different maybe a dex tank, or an archer.  To have that flexibility I'd want the freedom in the in the tactics selection to be able to support the alternative builds.

Take it easy

Modifié par Zexiv, 17 avril 2012 - 11:28 .

[Nerdage]

I don't see what that would add. It already annoyed me when I had to leave behind the character I wanted to take with me because there's someone whose abilities I needed more, that only got worse in DA2 when they stopped letting you spec companions into different weapon types (or even have them equip different weapon types), if they hard-wired what role a companion could take via tactics then some companions would simply never see the light of day because they'd be tactically useless to me.

Plus, I've never left their tactics at the default, or even made my own really, I let tactics decide who they auto-attack but I do all the abilities myself. If I couldn't do that anymore it'd be a whole different game, one I doubt I'd enjoy half as much.

Also, don't the current unique companion specialization trees kind of do what you're looking for anyway? Differentiate companions' play-styles?

[cJohnOne]

What if they brought back Weapon Proficiencies. BattleAxe part 1,2,3 and 4. Longsword 1,2,3, and 4. etc.

[the_one_54321]

What does that have to do with developing interacting tactics slots?

[nightscrawl]

All that would do would be to take more choice/options out of the players' hands, which is bad. It also doesn't allow you to weed out redundancy with follower builds/skills.

There are, for both DAO and DA2, perfectly good preset/suggestion tactics that are available. I don't see why it has to be changed from that. It lets the player who doesn't know or care about tactics to just pick something and go, while also giving the more experienced player the opportunity to fine tune their party for any situation and encounter.

So... no.

nerdage wrote...

It already annoyed me when I had to leave behind the character I wanted to take with me because there's someone whose abilities I needed more, that only got worse in DA2 when they stopped letting you spec companions into different weapon types (or even have them equip different weapon types), if they hard-wired what role a companion could take via tactics then some companions would simply never see the light of day because they'd be tactically useless to me.

The main flaw that DAO (the main game, not counting DAA) has in this regard is that you cannot respec your followers. It is of extreme annoyance to me to have several points wasted that I don't want, which includes those extra stat points you get in the fade on your PC. They really should have added a book with the Feastday DLC. That alone would have been worth the price for me. At least DA2 allows you to respec, provided you have the Black Emporium.

Modifié par nightscrawl, 18 avril 2012 - 12:16 .

[syllogi]

A default set of tactics, like giving a stubborn yet caring character a customized Tank tactics set, that would be pretty cool.

Forcing that character to ONLY tank, however, and limiting his tactics by taking away options -- that would be bad.

[cJohnOne]

I was fixing tactics to have a more unique style of fighting that you couldn't mess up. so they'd be more indepedent of the player. If you companion is already proficient in longsword you aren't as likely to change him up.

[cJohnOne]

Weapon Proficiencies are a better compromise than having a character invested in the wrong tree than you want.

[Xerxes52]

Nope, one of my favorite things to do in DA is to program my allies' tactics.