JaegerBane wrote...
Faerell Gustani wrote...
Why does mage have to be synonymous with "raw power"? Why can't mages just be an alternative artillery class with an emphasis in crowd control? Conceptually the new patch makes this more-so the case rather than having mages be OP.
For the same reasons that warriors use big swords and rogues pick locks and de-trap. It's part of their archetype.
Trying to suggest it's possible to depict someone who can blast a mob of thugs to cinders just by waving their hands but simulataneosly make them no different to warriors and rogues just demonstrates that you don't understand what you're talking about. It's logically no different to saying that there are two men in the street and each is taller than the other.
What's the different between a mage blasting the area and a warrior using some Anime styled sword technique to kill 10 enemies at once? Functionally, not much. They managed to implement some silly warcry that does an AoE knockdown for the Champion spec, and include Scattershot which is a grenade like stun attack that somehow has no friendly fire...
It's not too much of a stretch to have warriors dealing wide area AoE damage as if they were Kratos (God of War series) swinging around those chain-blades in a wide arc that covers a good 20 ft radius.
Or perhaps a charging attack that damages a 30ft line of enemies while moving the warrior forward.
My point is that power comes in different forms and quanities. Just because mages should be "powerful" doesn't mean that warriors and rogues should be less powerful.
A skilled swordsman should be as much as a threat as a skill spellcaster. A threat in a different sense, but a threat none-the-less. CC powers are incredibly powerful and useful in of themselves, there's no need to grant mages the increased survivability that rogues and warriors have, yet the option is present via Arcane Warrior.
They're artillery and crowd control. Big guns. Being powerful is part of the allure, and part of their role. I have yet to hear anyone from the mage-hater crowd actually suggest a realistic implementation of how to make a guy with a dagger and a lockpick somehow equal to a guy who calls down thunderstorms and clouds of death on his opponents. So far, the best one I've heard is make mages just alternative archers with pretty FX. If that's your thing than, at the risk of resorting to cliche, mod it.
See, you're talking about realism and magic here. We're not looking for realism. We're looking for game balance.
I suppose a good "balance" would be to completely nuke a mage's ability to defend or wear armor. Have them drop in 1-2 hits. Have them actually be fragile and glass cannons, currently they easy survive a small swarm of enemies. Thus applying a drawback. If your spells are resisted you're effectively dead/useless. More immunities and elemental resistances on enemies as well.
Or if you want to go for a "lore" answer, see my signature. Let's apply the potential for demons to possess your mage.
The current arguments for having mages not get nerfed generally revolve around people who don't care, or people who want power without the associated drawbacks.
The new patch is actually not bad. I frankly don't see what it is about the new patch that makes mages comply with your definition of balance. They still stun and wipe stuff out and generally make enemies their playthings. The only reason I'm not using it is because of Bioware's rather dubious methods of modifying equipment in game without noting it down.
Definitely, I like the patch. Mages still fulfill a critical support role in their numerous amounts of CC abilities and healing and stam/mana regen abilities.
I'm very glad that the power of a mage is no longer a result of using the same attack over and over again. If you want to stunlock an enemy, you have to work at it. Alternate between CoC, mindblast and Paralysis cooldowns and the likes. That's fair to me.
The sheer availability of potions and whatnot places fewer limits on them than really should be, but the end of the day this is a single player game. If you're finding it too easy than it's because you've made it too easy. Mages don't have all the advantages. They're still squishy, which is why they need warriors. They're still useless in non-combat tasks, like lockpicking and trap-clearing. Granted, it is possible to make a mage that isn't squishy - but to do this you really need to go out of your way to make a powerful mage - to bill a powerbuild as 'overpowered' is a bit like saying that grass is too green. What do you expect?
True, the potion issue is another breaking point in the game that makes it too easy.
However, I disagree with your statement that the game is too easy because I make it so. No, the game is too easy because th designers made it so. I, like many others, am just using the tools available to me (and not using any exploits like Taunt+FF or other forms of AI abuse).
I'm working with in the game rules.
As for a powerbuild and what I expect? I expected a drawback. I went out of my way to make a powerful mage, then I expect some aspect to be weak and exploitable by an enemy. Focusing on one area should lead to the detriment of another, that is an aspect of game balance.
The problem with mages and why they're considered overpowered is because they have no weak points. Go arcane warrior and you have mages to Tank, DPS, CC, and Heal...and they can do it just as good (or better) as other classes in the game.
So, short story short, I'm looking for drawbacks to mages. There are none.
Drawbacks to warriors? They're slow, require good gear and cannot have both survivability and good damage output at the same time.
Drawbacks to rogues? high vulnerability to CC and other such effects. Their good damage output depends a bit on tactical positioning (flanking for backstabs).
Drawbacks to mages? None really.
Retour en haut
