290 réponses à ce sujet

[Godeshus]

 My first playthrough I had to quit at level 10 from getting owned so bad constantly. I struggled the entire time. Poor in game tooltips led me to believe that my character choices were good when selecting them, but turned out to be seriously bad choices. My PC was a sword and board, but Morigan was so nerfed she was next to useless. Died in like 2 seconds, while my "tank" couldn't even handle a mob of whites.  I learned the game, though, during these 10 levelups, and then started a new character (an AW/BM Mage), and the Hard difficutly  was just right for me after fiddiling with the difficulty slider a bit. 

I enjoy strategy but am not a hardcore competitor. I like to experiment and see different aspects of the game. One thing I really love about Dragon Age is that I have the option, on one playthrough, to play a DPS mage that is godly. I also have the option, another playthrough, to play a support Mage that is only there to buff and heal the team, gimp the enemy, and fire a few shots from his/her staff whenever the situation presents itself. Then, on a 3rd playthrough, I can choose a Mage that is a little more in between, such as a shapeshifter, who can fly into battle, taking out a few enemies with webs and poisons, then turning back into a mage with support, or more offense depending on the scenario.

That, to me, is the ultimate form of balance in a game like Dragon Age.

Playing a Mage, making him UBER powerful, getting bored of it, then starting a new game, as a Mage, and making him equally as powerful, then getting bored, then starting a new Mage, and making him powerful... then coming to the DA forums to complain that the Mage is too powerful...

I understand why people hate to hear "If the mage is too powerful, then nerf him". I truly understand that this would irk some people. I only wish that these people would, in turn, take a step back and look at our (people who think the classes are fine) point of view is also valid. The only thing I have a problem with (in regards to the people who want less godly mages), is that currently we all have a choice on how to play our characters. As powerful as a god or as weak as a duckling, or anything in between.  If the Devs patch this even more than they already have, then we won't even have the options at all any more. And I don't think that is fair to the vast majority of DA players.

That is the reason that I feel the need to say "If your mage is too powerful, nerf him". You have the option. If the Devs Nerf them, we WON't have the option anymore.

À propos: You will NEVER have the same sense of challenge on a 2nd, 3rd, 4th playthrough that you had during your first. You now know the game, you know what to expect, and you know how to get ready for upcoming battles that your character should not even be aware of. Making mages less powerful will NOT make the game tougher or more challenging on these following playthroughs. The only thing that will make the game more challenging is:

A) increase difficulty
B)Nerf your characters, regardless of class.

I believe those that found the mage OP'd on their first playthroughs are either people who are excellent gamers, far better than the rest, or people who stumbled upon the right build going through the game.

I, for one, found the mage to be extremely underpowered on my first playthrough.

[Knut Are Mykland2]

better balance among the classes makes it harder to screw your builds up.

right now 2 handed weapons are among the weakest weapons there are. they are very slow.

dualwielding daggers with poison and momentum and runes on the other hand is very good.

if you go archery i recommend the best shortbow you can find. then you will do ok dps.



mages just start out way too good. 100 spellpower means you do 2x damage on your damage spells. if your spellpower is too low some spells can be resisted.

I could design a playermade char who could singlehandily kill 4 player controlled mages near the end game. Just stack up on + magic resists untill you reach the cap. logically it should be 75% but some idiot might have made dodge and magic resists cap at 100%.

balance wise the cap should be 50%!



point is mages scale badly in this game. they start out too good in the early game and stay good until the midgame, and then fade compared to the other good builds near the end game.



at level 16 and onwards the warriors and rogues can keep up with mages. before that mages reign supreme.

[Jonfon_ire]

better balance among the classes makes it harder to screw your builds up.

This basically. Not everyone who buys the game visits forums or looks up FAQs to see what combos work well. And since this is also a console game there's incentive for Bioware to ensure that anyone picking up the game can make a reasonably enjoyable and fun character who contributes to their little team. After all, you're supposed to be playing the Grey Warden, one who attracts followers and leads them. So regardless of the class you choose or the weapons you pick to specialize in it makes sense that your character should feel powerful enough to deal with whatever comes his way (not uber, just decent) and, more importantly, they should be fun to play, to suck people into the game and entice them to play it through and try any other Dragon Age expansions or sequels which come along.

[Wolfva2]

Tirigon wrote...

Wolfva2 wrote:
Again, why should the devs alter the game to appeal to the small
percentage who find the game easy when all those people have to do is
STOP PURPOSELY MAKING THEIR MAGES SO STRONG.  Heck, make a mage with
high strength instead of high magic and pick all first and second tier
spells.  Because it is YOU who are making the mages strong; all Bioware
did was give you the tools.  Stop blaming them for what you make with
those tools.

I do fully agree to that. I would even go so far as to say that a game that DOESNT allow you to become overpowered with the right build is poorly balanced. After all, you want to get a reward for finding out the best builds and spellcombos, dont you? If not, you could as well remove every spell, class etc and take a hero who hits with x damage, has y attackspeed and z hp, and 3 other heroes who have exactly the same stats. Then you would have great balance, and noone would be stronger than someone else. Do you really want that?
I dont.:sick::sick:

If I was a multi-millionaire this is exactly the game I would have made.  Just so I could point to how abysmally it failed LOL.

[Pocketgb]

Godeshus wrote...

 My first playthrough I had to quit at level 10 from getting owned so bad constantly. I struggled the entire time. Poor in game tooltips led me to believe that my character choices were good when selecting them, but turned out to be seriously bad choices. My PC was a sword and board, but Morigan was so nerfed she was next to useless. Died in like 2 seconds, while my "tank" couldn't even handle a mob of whites.  I learned the game, though, during these 10 levelups, and then started a new character (an AW/BM Mage), and the Hard difficutly  was just right for me after fiddiling with the difficulty slider a bit. 

I enjoy strategy but am not a hardcore competitor. I like to experiment and see different aspects of the game. One thing I really love about Dragon Age is that I have the option, on one playthrough, to play a DPS mage that is godly. I also have the option, another playthrough, to play a support Mage that is only there to buff and heal the team, gimp the enemy, and fire a few shots from his/her staff whenever the situation presents itself. Then, on a 3rd playthrough, I can choose a Mage that is a little more in between, such as a shapeshifter, who can fly into battle, taking out a few enemies with webs and poisons, then turning back into a mage with support, or more offense depending on the scenario.

That, to me, is the ultimate form of balance in a game like Dragon Age.

Playing a Mage, making him UBER powerful, getting bored of it, then starting a new game, as a Mage, and making him equally as powerful, then getting bored, then starting a new Mage, and making him powerful... then coming to the DA forums to complain that the Mage is too powerful...

I understand why people hate to hear "If the mage is too powerful, then nerf him". I truly understand that this would irk some people. I only wish that these people would, in turn, take a step back and look at our (people who think the classes are fine) point of view is also valid. The only thing I have a problem with (in regards to the people who want less godly mages), is that currently we all have a choice on how to play our characters. As powerful as a god or as weak as a duckling, or anything in between.  If the Devs patch this even more than they already have, then we won't even have the options at all any more. And I don't think that is fair to the vast majority of DA players.

That is the reason that I feel the need to say "If your mage is too powerful, nerf him". You have the option. If the Devs Nerf them, we WON't have the option anymore.

À propos: You will NEVER have the same sense of challenge on a 2nd, 3rd, 4th playthrough that you had during your first. You now know the game, you know what to expect, and you know how to get ready for upcoming battles that your character should not even be aware of. Making mages less powerful will NOT make the game tougher or more challenging on these following playthroughs. The only thing that will make the game more challenging is:

A) increase difficulty
B)Nerf your characters, regardless of class.

I believe those that found the mage OP'd on their first playthroughs are either people who are excellent gamers, far better than the rest, or people who stumbled upon the right build going through the game.

I, for one, found the mage to be extremely underpowered on my first playthrough.

If you don't like the way they change the game, then either lower the difficulty setting or use the toolset.


Now can you see why I hate it when people tell me that?

[Seraphael]

Haexpane wrote...

It's quite simple actually, the nerd exploiters and "dont nerf my OP toon" crowd insist "balance doesnt matter in Single Player" are ignoring the basics of game design.

"Balance" means each class has something to contribute, something to make them a worthwhile choice, and does not have abilities to make them the "best" choice in all scenarios.

I absolutely agree with the original poster. But I'd like to point out the fact that the balance isn't purely a class vs. class problem, it is also a problem within each class as some talents/spells are next to useless while others are extremely overpowered.

This imbalance is exacerbated by the lack of a decent manual or in game tooltip information. As a result, gameplay suffers as gamers who are unfortunate with their build, picking inferior powers through no fault of their own, have a hard task beating the game. Whereas experienced players can exploit these gross imbalances to make even the hardest difficulty level trivial. Bad gamedesign right there.

Moreover, the rampant imbalances affect gameplay negatively as real choices are diminished and stereotypical gameplay enforced by relying on a select few uber powers that will win you almost any combat without use of tactics. More bad gamedesign.

It is little doubt Bioware did an EXTREMELY poor job in this regard. For the love of gawd, don't let the people responsible for this work on your upcoming Star Wars MMO where balance is absolutely crucial - even in a world of sith and jedi. It'll go down in flames before you can say: "it's canon and force users are supposed to be powerf...".

~ mage player

[Pocketgb]

Seraphael wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

It's quite simple actually, the nerd exploiters and "dont nerf my OP toon" crowd insist "balance doesnt matter in Single Player" are ignoring the basics of game design.

"Balance" means each class has something to contribute, something to make them a worthwhile choice, and does not have abilities to make them the "best" choice in all scenarios.

I absolutely agree with the original poster. But I'd like to point out the fact that the balance isn't purely a class vs. class problem, it is also a problem within each class as some talents/spells are next to useless while others are extremely overpowered.

This imbalance is exacerbated by the lack of a decent manual or in game tooltip information. As a result, gameplay suffers as gamers who are unfortunate with their build, picking inferior powers through no fault of their own, have a hard task beating the game. Whereas experienced players can exploit these gross imbalances to make even the hardest difficulty level trivial. Bad gamedesign right there.

Moreover, the rampant imbalances affect gameplay negatively as real choices are diminished and stereotypical gameplay enforced by relying on a select few uber powers that will win you almost any combat without use of tactics. More bad gamedesign.

It is little doubt Bioware did an EXTREMELY poor job in this regard. For the love of gawd, don't let the people responsible for this work on your upcoming Star Wars MMO where balance is absolutely crucial - even in a world of sith and jedi. It'll go down in flames before you can say: "it's canon and force users are supposed to be powerf...".

~ mage player

Awesome post, especially the bit about "powerf...", lol

[Godeshus]

Pocketgb wrote...

Godeshus wrote...

 My first playthrough I had to quit at level 10 from getting owned so bad constantly. I struggled the entire time. Poor in game tooltips led me to believe that my character choices were good when selecting them, but turned out to be seriously bad choices. My PC was a sword and board, but Morigan was so nerfed she was next to useless. Died in like 2 seconds, while my "tank" couldn't even handle a mob of whites.  I learned the game, though, during these 10 levelups, and then started a new character (an AW/BM Mage), and the Hard difficutly  was just right for me after fiddiling with the difficulty slider a bit. 

I enjoy strategy but am not a hardcore competitor. I like to experiment and see different aspects of the game. One thing I really love about Dragon Age is that I have the option, on one playthrough, to play a DPS mage that is godly. I also have the option, another playthrough, to play a support Mage that is only there to buff and heal the team, gimp the enemy, and fire a few shots from his/her staff whenever the situation presents itself. Then, on a 3rd playthrough, I can choose a Mage that is a little more in between, such as a shapeshifter, who can fly into battle, taking out a few enemies with webs and poisons, then turning back into a mage with support, or more offense depending on the scenario.

That, to me, is the ultimate form of balance in a game like Dragon Age.

Playing a Mage, making him UBER powerful, getting bored of it, then starting a new game, as a Mage, and making him equally as powerful, then getting bored, then starting a new Mage, and making him powerful... then coming to the DA forums to complain that the Mage is too powerful...

I understand why people hate to hear "If the mage is too powerful, then nerf him". I truly understand that this would irk some people. I only wish that these people would, in turn, take a step back and look at our (people who think the classes are fine) point of view is also valid. The only thing I have a problem with (in regards to the people who want less godly mages), is that currently we all have a choice on how to play our characters. As powerful as a god or as weak as a duckling, or anything in between.  If the Devs patch this even more than they already have, then we won't even have the options at all any more. And I don't think that is fair to the vast majority of DA players.

That is the reason that I feel the need to say "If your mage is too powerful, nerf him". You have the option. If the Devs Nerf them, we WON't have the option anymore.

À propos: You will NEVER have the same sense of challenge on a 2nd, 3rd, 4th playthrough that you had during your first. You now know the game, you know what to expect, and you know how to get ready for upcoming battles that your character should not even be aware of. Making mages less powerful will NOT make the game tougher or more challenging on these following playthroughs. The only thing that will make the game more challenging is:

A) increase difficulty
B)Nerf your characters, regardless of class.

I believe those that found the mage OP'd on their first playthroughs are either people who are excellent gamers, far better than the rest, or people who stumbled upon the right build going through the game.

I, for one, found the mage to be extremely underpowered on my first playthrough.

If you don't like the way they change the game, then either lower the difficulty setting or use the toolset.


Now can you see why I hate it when people tell me that?

I'm completely fine with playing the game as is, and when there's a patch, I update my game. I'm fine with the way things were before patch 1.02. I'm fine with the way things are AFTER patch 1.02. I don't know where you got the idea that I didn't like the way they chagned the game, but I can very easily turn your statement around. If YOU don't like the way the game is, YOU can use the toolset. I'm not the one asking Bioware to change my game for me, but I'll take what they give me and enjoy it as much.

I have no obsession with making a godly character. It makes me happy to play MY game by limiting MY characters abilities. I am also happy to play MY game by POWERING my characters. What you're asking Bioware to do is to take this option away from me, and I don't think that's fair.

[Tirigon]

point is mages scale badly in this game. they start out too good in the early game and stay good until the midgame, and then fade compared to the other good builds near the end game.

Thats it. A good nerf would be to make spells in earlygame weaker, but stronger in lategame, for example by lessening the constant effect and improving the effect spellpower has.

@Pocketgb: You say, you quit DotA because troll and such are too strong. That´s your problem, and I think everyone whining about mages has the same. Troll is NOT overpowered, a wellplayed Int-hero can kill him easily even in lategame, and I prefer heroes like stormspirit, though I´m not one of these pros owning everything.
Here, it´s the same with mages: If you think they are too strong, you dont play in the right way. Atm, my level 11 Dualwield-Warrior is only slightly less powerful than my level 20 AW/BM. And I guess, with 9 levels more AW is allowed to be that little stronger without anyone giving the right to say "MAGES ARE OP! NERF!!!"

Modifié par Tirigon, 10 décembre 2009 - 05:38 .

[mathewgurney]

Balance for me in a single player is player skill vs game realism, and im not talking absolute realism because in that case i wouldn't be running around smiting zombies or whatever, just things behaving in a state of normal humanly understood physics. Please dont get into microcosms, yes very small things dont operate normally but lets ignore that here.



Bad balance....

Doesn't matter how many times i stick my sword repeatedly into that dudes eye he doesn't die even tho by now his head is hamburger because difficulty is on hard so he has 100000000000 hitpoints, this depresses me because it is not realistic.



Good balance....

I have enough skill to expertly fight that dude and kill him but im losing because his buddy keeps coming up and kicking me in the back of the head while im not watching although im still happy because its realistically difficult and lifelike.



To sum up, more mobs is how difficulty should be implemented not by making mobs unrealistically resilient.

[Pocketgb]

Godeshus wrote...

...but I can very easily turn your statement around...

Exactly, that's the point: "use the toolset" or "nerf it yourself" are completely tennis-match arguments and are repeated ad-nausem on these boards. My comment wasn't meant to be taken seriously, more as to why it's the most bullcrap thing to say.

In regards to "powering" your characters: some people feel that this can be taken too far. Whether the devs agree or not is still up in the air, but the latest patch was indeed pretty interesting.

Tirigon wrote...

@Pocketgb: You say, you quit DotA because troll and such are too strong...

I never said that. I said I left it because I much more prefer the way carries are implemented in LoL, and I was never a fan of denying.

Modifié par Pocketgb, 10 décembre 2009 - 07:17 .

[Wolfshayde1]

Wyllowe wrote...

Rarely do we encounter true balanced play, whether it's a game or live reality. In real life or a game, you either acknowledge and adapt to conditions... or you perish. Discounting it with a "ppppffftttt... it don't matter" attitude, is what leaves you bleeding out or dead.
The people dancing on your grave don't give a rat's arse whether you thought the fight was fair and balanced.

ohhhhh I like you....great post



Wolf

[Haexpane]

Wolfshayde1 wrote...

Wyllowe wrote...

Rarely do we encounter true balanced play, whether it's a game or live reality. In real life or a game, you either acknowledge and adapt to conditions... or you perish. Discounting it with a "ppppffftttt... it don't matter" attitude, is what leaves you bleeding out or dead.
The people dancing on your grave don't give a rat's arse whether you thought the fight was fair and balanced.

ohhhhh I like you....great post



Wolf

There is no grave dancing or teabagging in DAO so that is irrelevant. 

Everyone is already "adapting to conditions"  that is also irrelevant.   Exploiting glitches and balance not working as INTENDED by the devs is what we are talking about.

Not "oh I'm so clever I found a way to shoot through walls where the AI can't see me"

[Mikey_205]

Balance is important to a point. A party with a warrior rogue mage and x should be better than a party of mage, mage, mage and mage or rogue, rogue, rogue and rogue.

I think we need an old fashioned DnD split between heal magic users and damage mages. CC and damage to the mages and group buffs and buffs targetable on others to the new healing specialised mages. Increase maximum party size to 5 or 6 and we're sorted. People who don't want to use healers and damage mages have got to realise its a fantasy game and therefore not using them is going to make it a lot harder. At the same time a mage with melee presence shouldn't out tank a warrior and there should always be a place for one of every class, but not to the point where there is no overlap so you are forced to take one.

To be honest mages are only covering so much ground because they have all the damage spells, healing spells and CC. Normally these would be split a little bit more but since there is only arcane magic and no divine or nature magic in this game unlike DnD and all the other origins are forbidden from any real magic at all they've backed themselves into the corner of having one origin doing everything remotely magical to fit the setting.

Either differentiate Mages into two categories or provide an armoured healer by creating a dedicated Templar (Cleric) class that has some melee but mostly healing and buffing spells. I'd imagine it wouldn't be too hard to come up with a logical reason given the turbulent times.

[Tirigon]

Balance is important to a point. A party with a warrior rogue mage and x should be better than a party of mage, mage, mage and mage or rogue, rogue, rogue and rogue.

No, it shouldnt. It should depend on how you play your 4 heroes, not which class they are. Besides, in the current DA:O a Party including one of each class IS the most effective.

I think we need an old fashioned DnD split between heal magic users and damage mages. CC and damage to the mages and group buffs and buffs targetable on others to the new healing specialised mages. Increase maximum party size to 5 or 6 and we're sorted. People who don't want to use healers and damage mages have got to realise its a fantasy game and therefore not using them is going to make it a lot harder. At the same time a mage with melee presence shouldn't out tank a warrior and there should always be a place for one of every class, but not to the point where there is no overlap so you are forced to take one.

I disagree. The more the classes are limited, the less freedom. I really wish it was like in Oblivion, when you could create your own class and, at least with difficulties, use skills your class doesnt have, too.

To be honest mages are only covering so much ground because they have all the damage spells, healing spells and CC. Normally these would be split a little bit more but since there is only arcane magic and no divine or nature magic in this game unlike DnD and all the other origins are forbidden from any real magic at all they've backed themselves into the corner of having one origin doing everything remotely magical to fit the setting.

Again, you could consider that to be an advantage rather than a bad thing.

Either differentiate Mages into two categories or provide an armoured healer by creating a dedicated Templar (Cleric) class that has some melee but mostly healing and buffing spells. I'd imagine it wouldn't be too hard to come up with a logical reason given the turbulent times.

Ok, a new class would be nice. But then, what you want is basically nothing else than an AW with second specialisation spirit healer and focusing on the healing tree in your spells, so you could just make one right now.

Pocketgb wrote:

Tirigon wrote...

@Pocketgb: You say, you quit DotA because troll and such are too strong...

I
never said that. I said I left it because I much more prefer the way
carries are implemented in LoL, and I was never a fan of denying.

Ok, I misunderstood you then, sorry. But it doesnt change what I said about mages in DA:O

Modifié par Tirigon, 10 décembre 2009 - 09:58 .

[TheBearMage]

Shouldn't someone capable of shooting lightning out of their fingertips and creating giant flaming tornadoes be more dangerous than a man who can swing a sword or shoot an arrow?

[Ickabod27]

I have a different view on the balance, as long as all characters are able to complete the game, they are balanced in my opinion. Yes in DA Mages are much more powerful than say a Warrior, but that also fits in with the lore of the game. Mages in the DA world are something to be feared, much more feared than the random guy with a sword in his hand.



The other issue with balance is that you can set up a party to have whatever you want in it anyway. So any party can be balanced to your style, some people say that you "have" to use Wynne, I rarely ever use her.



Also as you play the game, you get better at it, knowing how to use a mage to it's fullest ability is pretty easy, but once you know to use the other classes they can be very powerful as well. Two shield and sword warriors can stun lock a boss forever if done correctly.



I can understand people saying that all classes should be equal, but I think it's more interesting if they are different.

[Shadowravyn]

Simple question, if you are making all classes perfectly balanced, aren't you just going the FPS route? I think the real problem is that we are seeing that some have found ways to take certain classes and making, for that particular player, the class too powerful. But then isn't that the point of allowing a person the options to develop a character how they want it? Take Halo or Gears or some of those, all the character are basically the same. Take Counter Strike or some of those FPS's that have different classes, each serves a role.

Mages in DOA can serve multiple purposes. Unless you are using cheats or mods, you can't fill every skill tree. You may make one mage very healing oriented, another a tank, or another one a DPSer. you can also make a very powerful (or overpowered) mage that can serve multiple purposes as well.

The point I think many who are arguing against the patch is simple, and it should be considered valid even if you don't agree with it.The point is that pre patch, there were choices available to player that are not available now. Some may say that there are more choices now because they would want to play the mage now, but the point is that choices have been removed. It is entirely personal opinion as to whether the change was good or bad, so those saying the game is better now, need to qualify it by saying the game is better for them. This goes for the other camp too.

But this is a role playing game. The player is deciding how to play it. If they are more concerned with developing an overpowered character over roleplaying the character, then that is their choice. But some players may choose to go a more Role playing route and choosing to develop their character based on how they feel that role should be, not on what will make them godly. The patch made it more difficult for those that wish to role play the character. Those demanding the patch did in fact remove choices or fun for others that were in the game.

Two final thoughts before I get crucified. Why do we always ask for nerfing of classes, instead of asking for improvements to other classes?

The second question is doesn't it seem that Bioware wanted mages to be extremely powerful? This statement is based solely on the point that at some point in the game (spoiler):



you are given a choice of allies. Most of the choices give you up to 50 of that particular ally, but with mages you are only given 12.

Just a few thoughts.

Modifié par Shadowravyn, 10 décembre 2009 - 10:25 .

[Haexpane]

TheBearMage wrote...

Shouldn't someone capable of shooting lightning out of their fingertips and creating giant flaming tornadoes be more dangerous than a man who can swing a sword or shoot an arrow?

Only from a distance... Remember when Darth Vader simply scooped up the Emp Palp and tossed him like a club kid doing too much fist pumping?

DAO mages have no fear up close, they can wear plate

[Faerell Gustani]

Ickabod27 wrote...

I have a different view on the balance, as long as all characters are able to complete the game, they are balanced in my opinion. Yes in DA Mages are much more powerful than say a Warrior, but that also fits in with the lore of the game. Mages in the DA world are something to be feared, much more feared than the random guy with a sword in his hand.

First point with regard to your lore argument.  It falls flat on two points...read my signature for the first point.
The second issue is that Warriors are not necessarily "random guy with a sword".  They are well trained badasses with swords.
Similarly, an apprentice mage who just started his cantrips should not be very powerful.
Your argument that "mages should be more powerful" reeks of elitism towards mages and a want for power without consequences.

The other issue with balance is that you can set up a party to have whatever you want in it anyway. So any party can be balanced to your style, some people say that you "have" to use Wynne, I rarely ever use her.

You don't have to use anyone.  The game is already easy enough such that potion spamming solves 90% of your fights, but for those of us who don't like dumping tons of gold into potions and playing like retards, having a mage is near essential to party play.

Also as you play the game, you get better at it, knowing how to use a mage to it's fullest ability is pretty easy, but once you know to use the other classes they can be very powerful as well. Two shield and sword warriors can stun lock a boss forever if done correctly.

As Kaosgirl and I pointed out earlier, part of the problem is the stat system.  Mages can focus on a single stat: Magic and thus boost their ability to bypass resistances.
A sword/board warrior has to split strength, dex and sometimes con.
So unless you're playing on easy mode, I don't see how you can stunlock an orange mob with 2 shield warriors.  Also consider that they burn through their stamina much faster than a mage burns through mana...and there are no stamina potions as opposed to the liberal amounts of lyrium potions about.  So even if every stun/knockdown you threw both connected and was not resisted, you would be out of stamina before the boss was dead.

I can understand people saying that all classes should be equal, but I think it's more interesting if they are different.

Balance != Equal.  I think that's what many people fail to realise.
Balance means that "there exists a purpose to this class such that it is the best in some regard"
Pre-patch Mages destroyed that balance as they could deal damage, tank, and CC better than any other class.  The worst part is that it was done with a single spell: Cone of Cold.
I'm very happy for the CoC nerf.  I have no comment on the other nerfs though.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Knut Are Mykland2 wrote...

right now 2 handed weapons are among the weakest weapons there are.

That's not even close to being true.  They just requirea different playstyle.

Just as you can expect to play a mage the same way you would play a warrior or a rogue, you can't expect to play a 2H warrior the same way you would play a DW warrior and expect comparable results.

A 2H warrior is great for players who want to manage their character constantly.  A well-played 2H warrior is extremely powerful.  Contrast this with a sword&shield warrior, who does excellent work with just a few persistent abilities on.  Then you can leave him to tank and worry about other things.

[gloves8]

A good debate on here with everybody having very valid points. Just looking through the varying opinions will give you a good idea on the sort of challenge Bioware have in acquiring this mythical 'balance'.



The other thing I would say is that Bioware have this challenge and have to try to live up to it (i.e. they actually have to put out a game that is then ruthlessly taken apart and examined by thousands of players who have their own take on what is 'right' or wrong') whereas it is much easier for us to throw up issues for debate as our own ideas will rarely, if ever, be implemented and put to the test since we won't be releasing a game to the masses.



For all we know, if each of us released our own versions of the game, we still might end up finding the same number of people criticising our decisions on 'balance', or what is or is not immersive etc. or maybe many won't even like our own versions of the game! But we'll never know.

[fchopin]

Tirigon wrote...

@ fchopin: Warriors are at least as strong as mages when built right (I played as AW/BM and dualwielding warrior so far, so I could compare and I think the game is easier with my warrior), and I´ve seen many people claiming rogues to be even stronger than warriors, so telling you dont stand a chance without mages just shows that you are doing something wrong. And even if it was REALLY impossible, you could consider turning the difficulty down.

It is not about who is stronger but who has group control and group powers, the mage has the powers to control large group fights and also do large group damage.

Sorry for the late reply..

[fchopin]

Kaosgirl wrote...

fchopin wrote...

The game is unbalanced for some of the fight missions and the only way to get past them is to cheat basically, use mage with some of the silly powers just to get passed the silly mission.

It should be possible to play the game using any class without abusing some of the spells.

Many people have said it can be done.  It's maybe harder without a mage, but not impossible.

Yes but that is the problem, you are saying it can be done and it is not impossible and I agree.
But why associate impossible and can be done with a normal game, that should be for higher difficulties and not on normal.

[Tirigon]

fchopin wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

@ fchopin: Warriors are at least as strong as mages when built right (I played as AW/BM and dualwielding warrior so far, so I could compare and I think the game is easier with my warrior), and I´ve seen many people claiming rogues to be even stronger than warriors, so telling you dont stand a chance without mages just shows that you are doing something wrong. And even if it was REALLY impossible, you could consider turning the difficulty down.

It is not about who is stronger but who has group control and group powers, the mage has the powers to control large group fights and also do large group damage.

Sorry for the late reply..

Ok, but Warriors have taunt + threaten, that is group control, and a few AoE attacks too. Besides, the way I see it mages are meant to be the AoE and control guys, while warriors have definitely more dps against a single target. (Punisher, for example, can easily deal far more than 100 damage and knockback on Lv11; a lategame 2h-warrior can sometimes strike for 100+damage with his autohit and so forth)

Pre-patch Mages destroyed that balance as they could deal damage, tank,
and CC better than any other class.  The worst part is that it was done
with a single spell: Cone of Cold.

Reading this starts getting on my nerves. Its nothing but sh!t. Cone of Cold was nice, sure, but it has less damage than my dualsweep or whirlwind (dual wield skills), its freeze just sucks against guys like revenants or other strong bosses, and its no tanking ability at all. People who think that are suckers, nothing else. STFU now. Really.:sick:

Kaosgirl wrote...

fchopin wrote...

The
game is unbalanced for some of the fight missions and the only way to
get past them is to cheat basically, use mage with some of the silly
powers just to get passed the silly mission.

It should be possible to play the game using any class without abusing some of the spells.

Many people have said it can be done.  It's maybe harder without a mage, but not impossible.

Yes but that is the problem, you are saying it can be done and it is not impossible and I agree.
But why associate impossible and can be done with a normal game, that should be for higher difficulties and not on normal.

There is a youtube video in which someone solos the game on nightmare with a rogue. I´ve never seen evidence that mages can do that, and my own experience makes me disbelieve everyone who says they can. On lower difficulties we dont even need to argue: If you need a  mage to survive, you are doing something wrong.

Modifié par Tirigon, 11 décembre 2009 - 04:51 .