106 réponses à ce sujet

[Dagorgil]

Mobisto wrote..

Here's an analogy: Bioware creates an uber shield (100% physical damage and spell resist) and puts in your bag at the start of level 3. The shield has a HUGE warning: DO NOT EQUIP IF YOU DON'T WANT TO CHEESE YOUR GAME. What would you think about that?

If I didn't want to use it, I'd sell it to the nearest merchant for the short price of the weight of a king in gold.  That gold would then go to purchase stacks of elfroot to make lots of health poultices...

Just because something is in the game doesn't mean you have to use it if you don't want to.  Just like you don't have to pick Zevran up in your party.  I just kill him.  Useless Assassin.

[Kanner]

I don't like it, I don't use it.



I'm really not sure why you would want to play a GAME - involving rules and a simulated environment generated by those rules - without including any of the messy GAME stuff, but that's neither here nor there.



The world is full of ancient nerds who's only approach to video games has been 'quick, find the exploits', and it will long continue to be. So long as they do not expect anyone else to be impressed with their lack of skill, it's fine.

[Brigonos]

soteria wrote...

Brigonos wrote...

My argument is this:
You know what the spell does. You don't like it. You are not required to use it. You use it anyway.
Whatever could be done to prevent your mental anguish? You could (A) not use it or ( Cry about it and demand Bioware pull devs from real projects to change their game to conform to your personal vision.

(A) is much easier and the results are immediate.

Ok, so you're trolling.  Got it.

Do you have an argument for wasting limited development resources to change a mechanic that only bothers people who willfully abuse it?

Other than, "I don't like it so do what I want!"?

[Mobisto]

For those who want a really easy time "beating" a game, there's the cheat code.



For the rest, there are rules and balancing in a game that makes it challenging and rewarding to figure out. Force field a dying member should be a very valid tactic, not a silly exploit like it is right now. Having to choose to NOT use it explicitly is poor game design, I have no other way to put it.





BTW, with the new patch, it looks like you have to choose not to keep "rally" on while zoning. If this keeps up, there should be a Prima Guide: Dragon Age - How To Play The Game Correctly - Things Not To Do While Playing.

[Brigonos]

Force fielding a dying party member is a valid tactic under the current build. So is healing that character through spells or potions. Or the plentiful methods of crowd control. Or killing the bad guys. Or just letting him die and then stand up after the battle. Or just not sucking.



There is nothing wrong with the way it currently works. You may not like it, but that doesn't make it wrong. There are people who like the way it works. There are people who don't use magic at all. There is no reason to waste dev time on a matter of opinion.

[Mobisto]

Brigonos wrote...

Force fielding a dying party member is a valid tactic under the current build. So is healing that character through spells or potions. Or the plentiful methods of crowd control. Or killing the bad guys. Or just letting him die and then stand up after the battle. Or just not sucking.

There is nothing wrong with the way it currently works. You may not like it, but that doesn't make it wrong. There are people who like the way it works. There are people who don't use magic at all. There is no reason to waste dev time on a matter of opinion.

Sorry in advance for the insult.
But how DENSE are you exactly?

Here's a scenario: tank is swamped, tank is dying from the mobs surrounding him/her. Force field, and it's over. The mobs will keep on hitting the invincible tank for a good 20 seconds while you calmly kill them from behind.

If this is a valid tactic, my hat is off for your ...unbelievable... reasoning.

[CloudOfShadows]

Mobisto wrote...

Sorry in advance for the insult.
But how DENSE are you exactly?

Well. Yes. I really wanted to quote you. It seemed so appropriate.

And here's something I wrote earlier:

CloudOfShadows wrote...

Pennoyer wrote...

Do you really think Bioware intended the enemies to react to this spell like they do?  It really is simple.  Fix the stupid thing.

I think they did.

I remember someone from Bioware explaining that the game is about you (and me aka the players) dominating the battlefield. FF is a wonderful example of how we can dominate the battlefield. I think it works as intended. It's one of those spells you can pick up to make your experience more enjoyable, if you face difficult battles - or skip over, if you find battles are not challenging enough for you.

[Mobisto]

I remember someone from Bioware explaining that the game is about you (and me aka the players) dominating the battlefield. FF is a wonderful example of how we can dominate the battlefield. I think it works as intended. It's one of those spells you can pick up to make your experience more enjoyable, if you face difficult battles - or skip over, if you find battles are not challenging enough for you.

Wow, sorry for missing this. It Is Priceless!



With the 1.02 patch, Bioware just answered your prayer, again. Now you just need to activate rally, zone a few times, and you end up with a physically untouchable party.

Prima really needs to publish said book ASAP...

[EleventhLokust]

Mobisto wrote...

I remember someone from Bioware explaining that the game is about you (and me aka the players) dominating the battlefield. FF is a wonderful example of how we can dominate the battlefield. I think it works as intended. It's one of those spells you can pick up to make your experience more enjoyable, if you face difficult battles - or skip over, if you find battles are not challenging enough for you.

Wow, sorry for missing this. It Is Priceless!

With the 1.02 patch, Bioware just answered your prayer, again. Now you just need to activate rally, zone a few times, and you end up with a physically untouchable party.
Prima really needs to publish said book ASAP...

Rally is clearly a bug while there is no equally clear indication that AI behavior in regards to Force Field is also a bug.  I think equating the two weakens your argument.

[Mobisto]

EleventhLokust wrote...

Rally is clearly a bug while there is no equally clear indication that AI behavior in regards to Force Field is also a bug.  I think equating the two weakens your argument.

I use the same reasoning as the guy above (Bioware wants us to dominate -eg cheesing- the battles).


If the current behavior of Force Field + Taunt is not classified bug as a bug, then the only alternative would be extremely stupid game design. Take your pick.

Modifié par Mobisto, 09 décembre 2009 - 08:00 .

[EleventhLokust]

Mobisto wrote...

EleventhLokust wrote...

Rally is clearly a bug while there is no equally clear indication that AI behavior in regards to Force Field is also a bug.  I think equating the two weakens your argument.

I use the same reasoning as the guy above (Bioware wants us to dominate -eg cheesing- the battles).


If the current behavior of Force Field + Taunt is not classified bug as a bug, then the only alternative would be extremely stupid game design. Take your pick.

I am inclined to believe that the behavior is intentional, but I won't make any judgments on the intellectual validity of the decision because I am just a guy playing the game that was provided to me.  If Bioware decides at some point that they want to change the design, I'll install the patch and keep going.  It will have absolutely no impact on my enjoyment of the game.

[tranj84cl]

High defense + Taunt means mobs can't hit you. Must also be a bug.

[Mobisto]

tranj84cl wrote...

High defense + Taunt means mobs can't hit you. Must also be a bug.

And how do you get high defense?
If you want to compare high defense with complete invincibility, be my guest.

Your sacred Bioware must never anything wrong, whatever happens in the game is intentional. It's up to us to balance the game by avoid this tactic. Those are all the arguments the BW worshippers can give?

[tranj84cl]

Mobisto wrote...

tranj84cl wrote...

High defense + Taunt means mobs can't hit you. Must also be a bug.

And how do you get high defense?
If you want to compare high defense with complete invincibility, be my guest.

Your sacred Bioware must never anything wrong, whatever happens in the game is intentional. It's up to us to balance the game by avoid this tactic. Those are all the arguments the BW worshippers can give?

Well, Templar with high defense (Dexterity stacking) and spell resistance is completely invincible.  It's like having a walking Force Field that can hit back.  So yes, it IS the same thing only better.

The game mechanics determine that the enemies go for the character with the highest threat level.  Heavier armor, certain skills like Overpower, and Taunt affect your threat.  If you ran around Taunting with massive armor and chugging potions, the rest of your party can kill everything easily too.  Is that a bug? By your argument, yes it is.

[Onlyasandwich]

I do agree that the taunt+forcefield tactic is cheesy and trivializes many encounters. I wouldn't agree that it's a hugely pressing issue. I would be pleasantly surprised and adapt if they "fixed" it in some way.



I don't think it's worth a lot of argument.

[shadow king 3]

it is called smart tactics, something i need when my mage gets his a** handed to him by any decent enemy darkspawn mage

[Mobisto]

tranj84cl wrote...

Well, Templar with high defense (Dexterity stacking) and spell resistance is completely invincible.  It's like having a walking Force Field that can hit back.  So yes, it IS the same thing only better.

The game mechanics determine that the enemies go for the character with the highest threat level.  Heavier armor, certain skills like Overpower, and Taunt affect your threat.  If you ran around Taunting with massive armor and chugging potions, the rest of your party can kill everything easily too.  Is that a bug? By your argument, yes it is.

First of, there's not a single way to build an "invincible" tank similar to force field in the game.

You need to mold the WHOLE character (equipments + attributes + lots of skill points) to make the said templar. Plus, if he gets eaten or overwhelmed, I'm not sure your templar might last.
Of course, when it comes to that, just put on force field, eh?

[tranj84cl]

Mobisto wrote...

tranj84cl wrote...

Well, Templar with high defense (Dexterity stacking) and spell resistance is completely invincible.  It's like having a walking Force Field that can hit back.  So yes, it IS the same thing only better.

The game mechanics determine that the enemies go for the character with the highest threat level.  Heavier armor, certain skills like Overpower, and Taunt affect your threat.  If you ran around Taunting with massive armor and chugging potions, the rest of your party can kill everything easily too.  Is that a bug? By your argument, yes it is.

First of, there's not a single way to build an "invincible" tank similar to force field in the game.

You need to mold the WHOLE character (equipments + attributes + lots of skill points) to make the said templar. Plus, if he gets eaten or overwhelmed, I'm not sure your templar might last.
Of course, when it comes to that, just put on force field, eh?

I agree that FF makes many fights too easy, but that wasn't my point.  You can use the mechanics of the game to your advantage.  Where do you draw the line? Is using 1 thing to make a fight easier any different than using 5? I played through nightmare without using Force Field once.  Hell, most of the game I used 4 warriors.  I used a mage to fight the high dragon, but all she had was the Heal and Regen line.  

So, because my party synergized and worked very well together, should that be given the nerfbat? Grab is countered by Shield bash or a knockdown skill. 

Comparing ease of gameplay with a game where I used FF, I'd say this was easier.  It was also more fun (for me).  It also shouldn't be nerfed.  If FF was nerfed for the arbitrary point that it made the game too easy, then you start down a slope where you nerf everything.

FF should have been nerfed because the AI is too "stupid" to target anything else.  As I mentioned earlier, it's the way the threat system works.  The *fix* should have been a drop in threat for the FF'ed character as opposed to cooldown or duration.

-Edit-
Also, try the build before you knock it.  It is pretty much unstoppable.  If I had the patience, I would not doubt for a minute that you could solo the game with this character.  Salve, potions go a long way toward convenience as well.

Modifié par tranj84cl, 09 décembre 2009 - 09:49 .

[EleventhLokust]

Mobisto wrote...

Your sacred Bioware must never anything wrong, whatever happens in the game is intentional. It's up to us to balance the game by avoid this tactic. Those are all the arguments the BW worshippers can give?

Obviously, Bioware is fully capable of making mistakes.  The Rally bug that you mentioned is certainly one such case.  Additionally, Bioware has also admitted to and corrected some mistakes already.  For example they fixed dexterity's impact on dagger damage.  There are still bugs to fix and there will be more mistakes made. 

My point, however, is that it isn't worth dwelling on what could or should be when Bioware holds all the power to determine what is.  Although, there is still plenty of opportunity to use mods to tweak your personal playing experience however you wish.

[menasure]

this thing would not be a "problem" if the AI would stop with the mindless following of one individual member ... actually i think something has changed because taunt seems to work better for me now but a lock on still happens from time to time and it's incredibly annoying if some boss or a horde of archers only have eyes for your healer instead of your heavy geared tank. some might like running in circles kind of tactics but i don't.



however forcefield is by itself only a "problem" if you make it a "problem" because the mobs do not use it and you are in no way forced to use it yourself. i did not have the spell in my first run through and the only time i used it for my second run was in the fight against Ser Cautrien to have a chance of beating her ... in a fight which you are not really meant to win.

the only weird thing about forcefield is how powerful the spell is while being in a 2nd line column with fairly low requirements but the targeting is a general AI problem as far as i can see.

[Pennoyer]

Force field is not in need of a nerf. Using it on an ally is just an exploit. I would be shocked if it is working how Bioware originally intended. Because it is so easy to abuse, it is harder to use legitimately as, for example, using on someone who is overwhelmed or grabbed.

[Gliese]

menasure wrote...

however forcefield is by itself only a "problem" if you make it a "problem" because the mobs do not use it and you are in no way forced to use it yourself. i did not have the spell in my first run through and the only time i used it for my second run was in the fight against Ser Cautrien to have a chance of beating her ... in a fight which you are not really meant to win.

How do you figure not meant to win? Do you figure Bioware was expecting people that fought her at that point to just quit and start a new game?

Attacking Tethoril in Candlekeep in Baldur's Gate is a fight you were not meant to win.

[CloudOfShadows]

I don't think using it on an ally is an exploit. In all games where there's a threat mechanics that includes cheesy stuff like taunt that generates nothing but threat, you are able to force the AI down the most threat path.



I think it works as intended - in all situations.



Personally, I even find the take enemy out of combat method to be the cheesier one - as threat level high + make invulnerable just seems like a clever use of the combat mechanics.



PS: Read manual: highest armor is more likely to be attacked. Fits wonderfully with your example. FF = infinitely high armor.

[planktonization]

Having just completed my first playthrough (as a mage, v1.02), I'm in agreement with those who say the taunt + FF combo is either bad design or a bug. While it is true you can choose not to use it, you need to know about it before you know not to use it, by which time you've likely already tainted your playthrough with its use.

Having enemies lose interest in the taunted +FF'd tank might be one way to fix this (although possibly restricted to more cunning / magic-savvy foe).

An alternative approach would be to try to retain the combo as a valid tactic, but reduce its effectiveness, as follows:

1. Reduce the FF duration when cast on party members (but retain the cool-down). The duration must be such that even a party with three mages is unable to FF lock the fourth party member.

2. Increase mana cost of casting FF

3. Caster unable to perform any other activity while maintaining the FF

4. FF takes longer to cast (like e.g. chain lightning)

There may even be an argument for not allowing friendly spells on the FF'd party member (although that would prevent the FF + heal tactic).

[themaxzero]

planktonization wrote...

Having just completed my first playthrough (as a mage, v1.02), I'm in agreement with those who say the taunt + FF combo is either bad design or a bug. While it is true you can choose not to use it, you need to know about it before you know not to use it, by which time you've likely already tainted your playthrough with its use.
Having enemies lose interest in the taunted +FF'd tank might be one way to fix this (although possibly restricted to more cunning / magic-savvy foe).
An alternative approach would be to try to retain the combo as a valid tactic, but reduce its effectiveness, as follows:
1. Reduce the FF duration when cast on party members (but retain the cool-down). The duration must be such that even a party with three mages is unable to FF lock the fourth party member.
2. Increase mana cost of casting FF
3. Caster unable to perform any other activity while maintaining the FF
4. FF takes longer to cast (like e.g. chain lightning)
There may even be an argument for not allowing friendly spells on the FF'd party member (although that would prevent the FF + heal tactic).

5. If you want that, why not just not use the spell.

Surely someone can make a FF mod that has a -threat component to it so we can finally put this to rest.